Advanced Search Beta »
Basic Search Fields
Battlefield 1942: The Road to Rome PC
  • Publisher: EA Games
  • Release Date: Feb 2, 2003
User Score
7.6 out of 10

Generally favorable reviews- based on 10 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 10
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 10
  3. Negative: 1 out of 10

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

view
per page
  1. StefanK.
    Apr 16, 2003
    5
    Don't know why this is rated so high. All it does is add 6 new maps, new skins, sounds for soldiers, 6 or something vehicles...and...that's it. Not worth $20 IMO. There are like 20+ mods in development for BF1942, all of them (maybe for the exception of Desert Combat) will be available for free. I see no reason for buying the new exp pack either Secret Weapons or w/e. If they don't add more content that is. Come on, DICE has SDK, knowledge and all so why don't they use it? And why don't they release the fucking SDK?!??! Following is from www.bfcentral.com: This subject has simmered on the back burners of my mind for awhile. Recent conversations and events have brought it to the point where I want to say something about it. EA is blundering with Battlefield:1942. Will this cause the game to fail? Probably not, because it is a great game. Are they preventing the game from being all that it can be? I would say most definitely. Charging for expansions to a first person shooter type of game is not something that is taken very well by gamers who play this genre since so many other companies have a history of releasing awesome expansions and game additions at no additional cost. Road to Rome was released at a cost of around 20 American dollars. To the uneducated game purchaser (whom I suspect to be the ones that are putting RtR on the top seller lists) this may seem to be a small price to pay for the additional game play. There seems to me to be several ways to determine if such a piece of software is worth the money. One way is to compare it to the original Battlefield:1942 product. Does RtR offer half (since it costs approximately half as much) the gameplay that original BF offers? I think not. BF has extensive single player campaigns with story lines. BF has many more vehicles, maps, and classes to play as. RtR just doesn't add much to the original game. Another way to determine if the pricing schedule is equitable would be to compare RtR to expansions and additions to other first person shooter games. How many successful game expansions in this genre can you think of that actually cost money? To tell you the truth, I can't think of any. Not that there isn't, but if there is any they are definitely the exception to the rule. I can think of many game additions that were absolutely free. Counterstrike, Team Fortress Classic, Rocket Arena, etc. Now obviously there is nothing inherently wrong with charging for an expansion pack. In fact, RtR shows up on best-seller charts on a consistent basis. The only thing I can think of to explain this is that people who are buying it are the type of gamers who go to Wal Mart and pick out a game based upon the art on the box. I've spoke to several server admins who had to take RtR off of the server because of the drop in number of players who played there. All Seeing Eye currently shows that out of the 1877 servers it has data on only 469 of those have RtR on them. Desert Combat .3 has 580 servers and those servers are about 40% more populated then the RtR servers and it costs a grand total of zero dollars. You may be wondering what all this has to do with anything since RtR is old news. Secret Weapons shall soon be here. Well, I've heard rumors that Secret Weapons will cost in excess of 40 dollars. Regardless of the final price, I don't think EA is doing the game justice by selling these expansion packs. In fact, the game would be better off if EA/Dice didn't develop these packs at all. Why would I say that? Three reasons: Linux server, SDK, and reputation. Why is a Linux server so important? For one thing, many clans get their server by hiring a gaming server provider to run a port for them. Many, many game companies run Linux-only boxes. It is also much, much easier for people to throw up a server for this great game when they don't have to spend hundreds of dollars on a semi-stable OS just to run a game server. The SDK is also of great importance to both EA/Dice and us, the end-user. We all benefit from the release of awesome maps and mods. EA gets a game with a greater shelf life. I imagine Half-Life sells much better than does any other 5 year old game. It seems that perhaps the resources spent on these expansion packs could have been better spent on finishing the original game. Finally, we end up with reputation. I know of many gamers who were upset with what they got for the 20 dollars they spent on RtR. If Secret Weapons doesn't just blow people out of the water, EA is just going to further tarnish their reputation. Especially if they still don't have a decent Linux server and SDK. What am I trying to say with all this? Several things. Battlefield needs the Linux server and the SDK. Battlefield does not need the expansion packs, there are plenty of other mods under development that won't cost the end-user a dime. Those things don't make EA any money, though. Some may argue that making money is what a company is all about, and I would agree. Does that justify making money at the expense of providing gamers with a full-featured game? I don't have all the answers, but it seems to me that things aren't being handled in the best possible way when it comes to BF:1942 at EA. As I told someone recently, it seems like they are trading the long-term success of their game for short-term profitablity. What do you think? … Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  2. MafiaGuy
    Nov 1, 2003
    6
    Hey, give us more in this expansion pack and it would be much better...
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. H.Lokesz
    Apr 24, 2003
    6
    BF1942 is a great game but the expansion doesn't add much. A few maps en a few new weapons. This should have been a free download for the fans.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  4. DavidL.
    Mar 10, 2004
    10
    It rocks.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  5. TylerD.
    Feb 23, 2003
    10
    The new maps and vehicles are a great addition. The maps are done very well, and the vehicles are very realistic. A great expansion pack!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
prev next
Page:
  • 1

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
84 out of 100

Generally favorable reviews - based on 22 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 22
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 22
  3. Negative: 0 out of 22
  1. Yahoo! Games
    80
    While DICE probably should have included a few more maps, and some editing material so that modders could more easily build on what they've been provided (you can release that software developer's kit any time now, EA!), it's hard to argue with this expansion when everything included in it is so good.
    Read full review
  2. G4 TV
    60
    We would have liked more maps and a solid fix for the sound problems.
    Read full review
  3. Computer Gaming World
    80
    The engineer's bayonet kill might be the most satisfying frag since "Half-Life"'s crowbar kills. [May 2003, p.92]
See all critic reviews »